England exposed

| by Nalin de Silva

( June 20, 2012, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) There are some people who believe that the President Mahinda Rajapaksa should not have gone to London in view of protests from dispersed LTTE supporters in England and the continental Europe. I am also of the opinion that he should not have gone to England but for different reasons. Why should the President of Sri Lanka take part in celebrations of the so-called diamond jubilee of the coronation of the queen of England and hence the head of the Anglican Church? Thank God or whoever for the government of Sri Lanka not deciding to erect a jubilee post or name the clock tower opposite the President’s House in Fort after her. I am not quite sure what would have happened if Ranil Wickremesinghe had been the President of the country. It was he who wanted to celebrate the five hundredth anniversary of the arrival of the Portuguese in this country.

It is true that we are still unfortunately in the so-called commonwealth of nations and that the President is the chairman of the Heads of Commonwealth Governments. The Commonwealth of all the 53 or so governments is still in London and it is England that benefits from this organization called the Commonwealth of Nations rather than the other member countries. The white nations such as Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are more than equal in this association and the politicians of the other countries are elected to various offices without any semblance of power in order to give the impression that they are also recognized. Does anybody think that England is benevolent enough to maintain this association in order to help the other countries?

The Commonwealth Business Council (CBC) decided to cancel the lecture by the President as they were scared of protests by some LTTE members England and the continental Europe. I do not know the exact number of persons involved in these protests but there could not have been more than a few thousands. It was a flop, especially when one remembers the support extended to the leaders by the government of the queen. The irony is that the President who was invited by the queen of England was not allowed to speak at the meeting of the CBC by a group of people who are supported by the government of the selfsame queen.

As we said last week an anti Sinhala website had published the following: "Rajapakse changed his travel plans at the last minute due to massive disruptions planned by activists. Officers On Watch and security details were changed every 2 hours at Colombo -similar to the civil war- to prevent information seeping out. Scotland Yard Firearms Officers were actively encouraging protests at Heathrow yesterday told protesters they would have done the same if their families had suffered like Tamils." Then the same website said: "Scotland Yard suggest protests be carried out today as well outside Dorchester and Hilton hotels, but a place has been already allocated in front of Hotel Hilton, Park Lane, London for demonstration against Rajapaksa".

Now Scotland cannot pretend to be that independent of the English Government and if the latter wanted it could have given ample protection to the President to deliver his speech dispersing the dispersed Tamils. However, the government of the queen had decided to act differently and they thought that the right of the LTTE to demonstrate against the visiting head of a "friendly" country who had been officially invited was more important that the right of the President to deliver the scheduled address. It is clear that the queen’s government, the Scotland Yard, CBC have all acted in unison to deprive the President of his right to express his opinion. If the queen’s government could not allow the President to deliver his speech one wonders how they are going to give protection to all the athletes who would be going to London for forthcoming Olympics.

When the President’s speech at Oxford was cancelled sometime ago it was made to understand that he was on an unofficial visit and the queen’s government had no role to play in the controversy. Even if the benefit of doubt is given to the queen’s government on that occasion on what grounds other than that of an expected protest by the dispersed Tamils was the freedom of speech was not given to a President of a "friendly" country who was on an official visit in connection with the diamond jubilee celebrations of the queen of England. It appears that England is of the opinion that the right of demonstration of uninvited dispersed Tamils from continental Europe and some such Tamils in England is far more important than that the freedom of expression of an invited Head of a Commonwealth country. When that head is also the chairman of the heads of the commonwealth nations the "gravity of the freedom" is much more. However, England being England does not recognize the heads of non white nations of the so called commonwealth especially when they have to take care of organizations such as the dispersed Tamils in Europe, who are being encouraged and used by the queen’s government to act against so called friendly countries.

The whole episode exposes England and the queen’s government in that country. England is not the democratic country it pretends to be respecting the freedom of speech especially if the speaker is not liked by the former. It is known that the moment Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa relinquishes his office as the President of Sri Lanka he would be arrested by authorities of the so called international community and that the queen’s government does not like the face of Mr. Rajapaksa, who gave political leadership to defeat the LTTE terrorists who were nurtured supported and encouraged by the English. The western democracy is such that they bar the Muslim women wearing their traditional dress on the pretext that the right of another person to identify the Muslim women is denied. Similarly the right of the dispersed Tamils who are being used by the west led by England in this chapter four of Tamil racism to protest is upheld against the right of speech of a President of a "friendly" country. England deceives the people in other countries as well as in England by allowing anybody to give a speech in the Hyde Park even against the queen and her government when they very well know that it would not upset the political, economical or cultural apple cart. These are bogus freedoms that even some Sri Lankans think highly of.

It is time we recognized England for what it had done to this country and not be deceived by the English rhetoric.